Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez on Wednesday joined a chorus of world leaders welcoming the announcement of a U.S.-Iran ceasefire but issued a thinly veiled swipe at the Trump administration for having initiated the hostilities.

“Ceasefires are always good news. Especially if they lead to a just and lasting peace. But this momentary relief cannot make us forget the chaos, the destruction, and the lives lost,” Sánchez said in a social media post, according to a translation.

“The Government of Spain will not applaud those who set the world on fire just because they show up with a bucket.”

Sánchez, who has emerged as one of the European Union’s leading critics of U.S. and Israeli strikes against Iran, called for “diplomacy, international law and PEACE” to prevail.

His comments come shortly after the U.S. president said he had agreed to suspend attacks on Iranian infrastructure for two weeks, sparking a broad-based relief rally across risk assets.

Trump had earlier threatened that “a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again” if no deal was struck by his Tuesday deadline.

Iranian officials said the temporary truce meant safe passage through the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz would be “possible,” subject to coordination with its armed forces and “technical limitations” — caveats that may give Tehran some room to define compliance on its own terms.

World leaders welcomed the ceasefire, although analysts characterized the agreement as fragile and warned that a substantial lack of trust on both sides will likely complicate the path to lasting peace.

Sánchez has repeatedly raised the ire of the White House since the U.S. and Israel first launched strikes against Iran on Feb. 28.

Spain’s government refused to allow two jointly operated bases in its territory from being used in U.S. strikes against Iran, before later closing its airspace to U.S. aircraft involved in attacks as it doubled down on its anti-war stance.

In response, Trump renewed his criticism of Spain’s defense spending and threatened to sever all trade ties with the southern European country.

Alongside Spain’s prime minister, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen welcomed the two-week ceasefire, saying it brings “much needed de-escalation.”

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas described the deal as “a step back from the brink after weeks of escalation.”

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer also welcomed the ceasefire agreement, saying it “will bring a moment of relief to the region and the world.”

Israel, for its part, backed the U.S. ceasefire with Iran but said the agreement doesn’t cover fighting against Iran-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, India, China and Japan all issued statements welcoming the diplomatic breakthrough, which was brokered by Pakistan.

Further talks to explore a comprehensive end to the Middle East crisis are scheduled to take place in Islamabad on Friday.

— CNBC’s Kevin Breuninger contributed to this report.

A temporary U.S.-Iran ceasefire sparked a broad relief rally across assets on Wednesday, but experts warned that any deal concerning lasting peace will be complicated by a major trust deficit.

The ceasefire came following hastened diplomatic efforts led by Pakistan and just hours before Trump’s threatened deadline for wiping out the entire Iranian civilization, briefly pulling the region back from the brink of a massive military bombardment.

Oil prices cooled to below $100 per barrel following the ceasefire announcement, but remain far above the pre-war levels of around $70 per barrel.

While U.S. President Donald Trump said the two-week ceasefire was contingent on the “complete, immediate, and safe opening” of the Strait of Hormuz, Iranian officials stated that safe passage through the strait would be “possible,” subject to coordination with its armed forces and “technical limitations” — caveats that may give Iran some room to define compliance on its own terms.

“This is a problem that could derail the ceasefire later this year,” said Matt Gertken, chief geopolitical strategist at BCA Research, warning that the coordination requirement remains a risky ambiguity in both sides’ statements so far.

Trump may temporarily accept Iran as a gatekeeper — with U.S. midterm elections approaching and gasoline prices sharply higher than before the war — but after the election, the U.S. national security establishment will start to demand a more permanent solution,” said Gertken. “Fighting will ignite later this year, if not later this month.”

Tehran also said that its armed forces will cease defensive operations if attacks against Iran are halted. After the ceasefire came into effect at 8 p.m. ET Tuesday, missiles were still launched from Iran towards Israel and several Gulf states.

The reprieve on Tuesday would allow some time for the two sides to reach a longer agreement to end the six-week-old war, which has killed thousands of people and sparked a global energy crisis, with their delegations expected to meet in Islamabad on Friday.

Iran is reportedly finalizing a joint maritime protocol with Oman to institutionalize coordinated management of tanker traffic through the strait, which could embed Iranian authority over the crucial energy artery into a standing bilateral agreement.

Israel agreed to suspend strikes but urged Washington to press for deeper Iranian concessions, including the surrender of enriched uranium stockpiles. In its 10-point terms, Iran requested Washington to accept its uranium enrichment program and the lifting of all sanctions.

The ceasefire will likely hold in the near term, given the economic costs accruing to the global economy from six weeks of conflict, said Michael Langham, emerging markets economist at Aberdeen Investments. “Parties with vested interest in stopping the conflict and reopening the strait will double down on efforts to find a compromise,” he said.

If the truce holds and the strait reopens, the global economic damage should prove manageable, Langham added. Central banks could broadly resume their pre-conflict paths — and attention may shift from inflation to growth, if commodity prices normalize quickly, he added.

The ceasefire sparked a relief rally in markets amid repricing for a de-escalation in the conflict, but investors will watch for something more durable than a two-week pause, Geoff Yu, senior market strategist at BNY, said on CNBC’s “Squawk Box Asia” on Wednesday.

“What the market is going to start pricing ahead is a first step towards further de-escalation and perhaps something more permanent,” he said, flagging that the disruption has extended beyond crude oil to commodities such as helium, critical to semiconductor manufacturers in South Korea and Taiwan.

The surging price of jet fuel isn’t the airline industry’s only problem. Now, it’s whether it will have enough.

Since the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran on Feb. 28, the price of jet fuel in the U.S. has nearly doubled, going from $2.50 a gallon on Feb. 27 to $4.88 a gallon on April 2, with the increases even sharper in other regions. The effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz is choking off supplies of both crude and refined products like jet fuel, further driving up the price.

That’s forcing airlines to consider cutting flights, especially overseas.

Carsten Spohr, CEO of Germany’s Deutsche Lufthansa, told employees in a webcast last week that the carrier is assigning teams to come up with contingency plans because of the war in the Middle East, including for drops in demand or a lack of jet fuel, a spokesman said. Those plans could include grounding some of its aircraft.

The U.S. produces a lot of jet fuel and isn’t as exposed as other regions like Europe and parts of Asia are in comparison. But aircraft fill up locally, so some U.S. airlines could face shortages on international trips.

United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby told reporters late last month that the carrier, which has the most service to Asia among U.S. airlines, would have to cut back its flights there. He also said it’s “not impossible” that airlines collectively would have to reduce service in that region.

He noted that as the price of jet fuel goes up, it could be more acute in parts of the U.S. that aren’t as connected by pipelines.

“There’s not enough refining capacity, and so fuel price prior to this and going forward is more susceptible to supply weakness on the West Coast than anywhere else in the country,” he said.

Kirby told employees earlier in March that the airline is preparing for oil to stay above $100 a barrel through 2027 and is pruning some of its flights in the near term.

“To be clear, nothing changes about our longer-term plans for aircraft deliveries or total capacity for 2027 and beyond, but there’s no point in burning cash in the near term on flying that just can’t absorb these fuel costs,” he said in a March 20 message to employees.

Airlines overall are pruning some flights for the coming months, though they often adjust schedules throughout the year to match demand, aircraft availability or other complications.

Domestic capacity in the second quarter for U.S. carriers is up 2.1%, down from previous plans of 2.3% growth, while total capacity is set to rise 1.1%, down from 2.4% on the week ended March 20, according to a Monday report from UBS.

“We expect more capacity cuts in the coming weeks,” UBS said.

So far, airline executives have said that travel demand is strong, but the fuel strains and price spikes are a headache for carriers and passengers alike as the peak summer travel season approaches.

Fuel is generally airlines’ biggest expense after labor, and carriers are already raising airfare and fees like for checked luggage to make up for the added cost.

Investors will be listening for more insights into how the jet fuel spike could affect the industry as airline earnings kick off Wednesday with Delta Air Lines. That carrier owns a refinery, so it could benefit from jet fuel sales.

The reticence expressed by Democrats about removing President Donald Trump from office — even after he ousted Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and attacked Iran without seeking congressional approval — quickly fell away after his latest threat to Iran.

The president’s Tuesday morning Truth Social post, which threatened “a whole civilization will die tonight” and raised the specter of nuclear war, began a chorus of calls either for Trump’s impeachment or for his removal via the invocation of the 25th Amendment. On Tuesday evening, Trump and Iran announced a two-week ceasefire.

“This is a threat of genocide and merits removal from office. The President’s mental faculties are collapsing and cannot be trusted,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., posted to X on Tuesday. “To every individual in the President’s chain of command: You have a duty to refuse illegal orders. That includes carrying out this threat.”

Trump’s ultimatum came ahead of his Tuesday night deadline for Iran to make a deal with the U.S. and reopen the Strait of Hormuz, the key shipping channel for the world’s oil out of the Persian Gulf.

The chance of Trump being removed from office is low, and his Cabinet members — who would have to play an active role in invoking the 25th Amendment — routinely publicly praise him.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., posted to X after the announcement that he was “glad Trump backed off and is desperately searching for any sort of exit ramp from his ridiculous bluster.”

But the pause may not be enough to forestall calls for removal in Congress, where dozens of Democrats — and a few Republicans — condemned Trump on Tuesday. Several said the ceasefire changes nothing.

“Just because a President announces he’s agreed to a two week ceasefire moments before he threatened to commit war crimes, does not mean he is suddenly fit to serve. #25thAmendment,” posted Rep. Melanie Stansbury, D-N.M.

Rep. John Larson, D-Conn., on Monday introduced articles of impeachment, citing Trump’s “serial usurpation of the congressional war power and commission of murder, war crimes and piracy.”

On Tuesday, Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., also advocated for impeachment. “When will it be enough for my Republican colleagues to grow spines and remove him from office?” Omar posted to X.

Others, such as Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., argued that Section 4 of the 25th Amendment — which allows for the involuntary transfer of power if the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet declare the president incapacitated — should be invoked.

“If the United States Congress has any life left in it, every member of Congress and senator must be calling for Trump’s removal today based on the 25th Amendment,” Khanna said in a video posted to X. “He is threatening the entire destruction of a civilization. He is calling Iranians animals.”

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said in a statement late Tuesday that Trump should be removed from office one way or another.

“If the Cabinet is not willing to invoke the 25th Amendment and restore sanity, Republicans must reconvene Congress to end this war.”

The White House criticized the calls for Trump to be removed from office.

“This is pathetic,” White House spokesperson Davis Ingle said in an email. “Democrats have been talking about impeaching President Trump since before he was even sworn into office. The Democrats in Congress are deranged, weak, and ineffective, which is why their approval ratings are at historic lows.”

Just 140 Democrats in December voted to advance a measure from Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, to impeach Trump.

Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., who has at times called for Trump’s impeachment, told CNBC in March that any such effort was off the table for at least as long as Democrats are in the minority in both chambers. And in an election year in which Democrats are trying to hammer Trump and Republicans on affordability, many see impeachment as a losing issue.

“I think when we take control of the House we will consider that,” Waters said.

But neither impeachment nor the use of the 25th Amendment is likely at the moment, with Republicans in control of both chambers and no open revolt within the Trump administration over the Iran war.

Section 4 of the 25th Amendment has never been invoked and would require buy-in from Vice President JD Vance, the Cabinet and eventually two-thirds of Congress if Trump argued he is not incapacitated.

Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene, the former Georgia representative and Trump acolyte-turned-antagonist, called Trump’s post “evil and madness.”

“25TH AMENDMENT!!! Not a single bomb has dropped on America. We cannot kill an entire civilization,” Greene posted to X.

Elected Republicans began to publicly recoil in the hours after the president’s initial proclamation that he would destroy the Iranian civilization.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, broke sharply with Trump in a social media post on Tuesday, condemning his rhetoric.

“The President’s threat that ‘a whole civilization will die tonight’ cannot be excused away as an attempt to gain leverage in negotiations with Iran,” Murkowski said. “This type of rhetoric is an affront to the ideals our nation has sought to uphold and promote around the world for nearly 250 years. It undermines our long-standing role as a global beacon of freedom and directly endangers Americans both abroad and at home.”

Murkowski, a moderate who has clashed with Trump in the past, said “[e]veryone involved — especially the President and Iran’s leaders — must de-escalate their unprecedented saber-rattling before it is too late.”

Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., a current Trump ally, broke with the president during a Monday appearance on the “John Solomon Reports” podcast. Johnson said he hoped Trump’s words were “bluster.”

“I do not want to see us start blowing up civilian infrastructure,” Johnson said. “We are not at war with the Iranian people. We are trying to liberate them.”

And Rep. Nathaniel Moran, R-Texas, in a statement posted to X on Tuesday pushed back on Trump’s rhetoric while stopping short of calling for his removal.

“I do not support the destruction of a ‘whole civilization.’ That is not who we are, and it is not consistent with the principles that have long guided America,” Moran wrote. “I have and will continue to support a strong national defense — one that is focused, disciplined, and firmly rooted in protecting the safety and security of the American people. But, how we protect the lives of the innocent is just as important as how we engage the enemy.”

Rep. Kevin Kiley, a former California Republican recently turned independent, in a post on X said, “The United States does not destroy civilizations.”

“Nor do we threaten to do so as some sort of negotiating tactic. We should all desire a future of freedom, security, and prosperity for the people of Iran,” he said, asserting that Congress “has a responsibility to conduct oversight with respect to ongoing military operations and our obligations under both U.S. law and international agreements to which we are a signatory.”